Ted was a victim of MK Ultra experiments, so he's understandably opposed to the doctrinal system.

JP is largely misunderstood. He makes statements that appear incendiary but have significant merit if considered carefully. The statements are generally gender and social rights/justice issues. He loses people when they ask him if he thinks a given situation is ok, and he generally responds, "I don't know", because no one has adequately researched the specifics of the topic being discussed (plus pinpointing causality in social sciences is dubious, at best). Public opinion on most social topics is largely based on unfounded social norms and sociological assumptions. This is the general thesis of 95% of his arguments.

For example: If women wear makeup at work, can that create an unintended/unforseen sexual/social message???

Imagine if women quit wearing makeup to work, or all men started wearing makeup, etc. Makeup or not, the workplace social environment will be impacted. The status quo is currently affecting society in ways that are not fully understood.

Then there's the non-gender pronoun debate, which is a SJW hot button issue that some use to attack him. The right supports him as, an enemy of my enemy; he's Canadian though and his views are to the left of most of theirs. You do have to listen carefully, because he doesn't state his personal views very often.

It appears that prior to WW2; the 6 million victims estimate had been bandied around in various newspapers for decades. Public foreshadowing propaganda similar to highjacked airplanes, WTC attacks, Arab terrorist Patsy's, etc.

Butler single-handedly prevented a fascist coup in the 30s during the FDR presidency. The conspiracy was to make Butler the president. He played along until he could positively identify all of the key actors (including Prescott Bush who I/was Dubya's grandad), and then reported it to FDR and the Congress.
FDR chose to do nothing. Butler was incredulous.

In criminal trial I can imagine this catching on, as it could produce more consistent sentencing outcomes; assuming the state didn't factor in some racial coefficient.

However, I doubt that senior corporate lawyers will ever be replaced by computers.
Corporate lawyers contractually scheme with execs for profit/advantage, or scheme for PR damage control. I'm not sure how execs could scheme with a legal program.

It's alarming to imagine a scheming AI bot that is connected to global high-speed trading systems. Something like a nascent SkyNET of Wall St.

Your butt dust words are confusing. Can summarize what's being said at Voat, in contrast to your assessment? Higher frequency = higher photon energy, which is generally associated with higher risk of unforeseen consequences.

I'm on the fence about the severity of 5G risks. However, I am in favor of making the telecoms deliver on their promise of delivering 1 Gbps using 4G frequencies. The existing bandwidths should be optimized; prior to rolling out 5G. 5G is sure to be a battery killer, and I don't know of any common applications that require more than 1 Gbps of data to function efficiently.

4G works just fine, so the state should not force communities to use 5G if they're opposed to it.